The Experts below are selected from a list of 8259 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Ho Jin Lee - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
analysis of Judicial Precedent cases regarding epidural injection in chronic pain management in republic of korea
Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, 2020Co-Authors: Soo Ick Cho, Su Hwan Shin, Haesun Jung, Jee Youn Moon, Ho Jin LeeAbstract:Background Although there is a low incidence of complications associated with epidural injections, pain physicians should still remain vigilant for potentially serious adverse outcomes. This study aimed to identify and describe the major complications of epidural injections. Methods This retrospective, observational, medicolegal study analyzed closed cases of Precedents involving complications of epidural injections from January 1997 to August 2019 using the database of the Supreme Court of Korea’s judgement system. Clinical characteristics and judgement statuses were analyzed. Results Of the 73 potential cases assessed for eligibility, a total of 49 malpractice cases were included in the final analysis. Thirty-three claims resulted in payments to the plaintiffs, with a median payment of US$103 828 (IQR: US$45 291–US$265 341). The most common complication was infection (n=13, 26.5%), followed by worsening pain (n=8, 16.3%). Physician malpractice before, during, and after the procedure was claimed by plaintiffs in 18 (36.7%), 44 (89.8%), and 31 (63.3%) cases, respectively. Of these cases, 6 (33.3%), 19 (43.2%), and 15 (48.4%), respectively, were adjudicated in favor of the plaintiffs by the courts. In cases involving postprocedural physician errors, the majority (13/15) of the plaintiff verdicts were related to delayed management. Violation of the physician’s duty of informed consent was claimed by plaintiffs in 31 (63.3%) cases, and 14 (45.2%) of these cases were judged medical malpractice. Conclusions Our data will allow pain physicians to become acquainted with the major epidural injection-associated complications that underlie malpractice cases.
Mahamad Arifin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Application of Doctrine of Judicial Precedent in Shariah Courts
2014Co-Authors: Sa'id Adekunle Mikail, Mahamad ArifinAbstract:The doctrine of Judicial Precedent plays an empirical role in common law, but it has only persuasive value in European continent countries which are practicing civil law system. It has not been recognised as having binding force in Islamic Judicial system. In Islam, each case has to be decided based on its own merit and previous decisions can only be considered as guidance for the future cases. This position is still being maintained by some countries such as Malaysia and Saudi Arabia. In Pakistan and Nigeria the doctrine of Judicial Precedent is applied in deciding cases. Due to this contradiction among Islamic Judicial system in various countries, a question arises relating to the feasibility of the application of the doctrine of Judicial Precedent in Shariah courts. Accordingly, in this paper, the factual nature of the Judicial Precedents in Islamic Judicial systems have been examined comparatively in some details with reference to some selected countries such as Malaysia, Nigeria and Pakistan. This paper points out that the doctrine of stare decisis and Judicial Precedent can be applied in Shariah courts as guiding Precedents but not as binding since there is no express prohibition in Shariah to take Judicial guidance from previous decisions.
-
Feasibility of the application of the doctrine of Judicial Precedent in civil and shariah courts
2013Co-Authors: Sa'id Adekunle Mikail, Mahamad Arifin, Ashgar Ali Ali MohamedAbstract:The doctrine of Judicial Precedent plays an empirical role in the common law system, but it only has persuasive value in European countries which are practicing the civil legal system. Moreover, it has not been recognised as having a binding force in the Islamic legal system and thus each case has to be decided based on its own merits and previous decisions were merely considered as guidance for the future decision. This position is still being maintained by some countries such as Malaysia and Saudi Arabia. In Pakistan and Nigeria, however, the doctrine of Judicial Precedent is followed. Due to this contradiction among the Shariah legal system in various countries, as a result, a question arises relating to the feasibility of the application of the doctrine of Judicial Precedent in Shariah Courts needs thorough study. Accordingly, in this paper, the factual nature of the Judicial Precedents in both civil and Shariah legal systems have been examined comparatively in some detail with reference to countries such as England, Malaysia, Nigeria and Pakistan. This paper points out that the doctrine of stare decisis and Judicial Precedent can be applied in the Shariah Courts system as guiding Precedents but not as binding Precedents since it is allowed in Shariah to take guidance from previous decisions and there is no express prohibition in Shariah on them.
Sa'id Adekunle Mikail - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Application of Doctrine of Judicial Precedent in Shariah Courts
2014Co-Authors: Sa'id Adekunle Mikail, Mahamad ArifinAbstract:The doctrine of Judicial Precedent plays an empirical role in common law, but it has only persuasive value in European continent countries which are practicing civil law system. It has not been recognised as having binding force in Islamic Judicial system. In Islam, each case has to be decided based on its own merit and previous decisions can only be considered as guidance for the future cases. This position is still being maintained by some countries such as Malaysia and Saudi Arabia. In Pakistan and Nigeria the doctrine of Judicial Precedent is applied in deciding cases. Due to this contradiction among Islamic Judicial system in various countries, a question arises relating to the feasibility of the application of the doctrine of Judicial Precedent in Shariah courts. Accordingly, in this paper, the factual nature of the Judicial Precedents in Islamic Judicial systems have been examined comparatively in some details with reference to some selected countries such as Malaysia, Nigeria and Pakistan. This paper points out that the doctrine of stare decisis and Judicial Precedent can be applied in Shariah courts as guiding Precedents but not as binding since there is no express prohibition in Shariah to take Judicial guidance from previous decisions.
-
Feasibility of the application of the doctrine of Judicial Precedent in civil and shariah courts
2013Co-Authors: Sa'id Adekunle Mikail, Mahamad Arifin, Ashgar Ali Ali MohamedAbstract:The doctrine of Judicial Precedent plays an empirical role in the common law system, but it only has persuasive value in European countries which are practicing the civil legal system. Moreover, it has not been recognised as having a binding force in the Islamic legal system and thus each case has to be decided based on its own merits and previous decisions were merely considered as guidance for the future decision. This position is still being maintained by some countries such as Malaysia and Saudi Arabia. In Pakistan and Nigeria, however, the doctrine of Judicial Precedent is followed. Due to this contradiction among the Shariah legal system in various countries, as a result, a question arises relating to the feasibility of the application of the doctrine of Judicial Precedent in Shariah Courts needs thorough study. Accordingly, in this paper, the factual nature of the Judicial Precedents in both civil and Shariah legal systems have been examined comparatively in some detail with reference to countries such as England, Malaysia, Nigeria and Pakistan. This paper points out that the doctrine of stare decisis and Judicial Precedent can be applied in the Shariah Courts system as guiding Precedents but not as binding Precedents since it is allowed in Shariah to take guidance from previous decisions and there is no express prohibition in Shariah on them.
Stanislav Shatalov - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Role of Precedent in the Tax Legislation
2015Co-Authors: Anna Zolotareva, Stanislav ShatalovAbstract:The paper analyses available in theory approaches to the definition of Judicial Precedent. Authors compared Precedent and Judicial legislation in the countries jus commune and Russia. They assess wide powers of the courts in Russia at the expense of the Constitutional Court and introduction of Precedent system in arbitrage
-
The Role of Precedent in the Tax Law of Foreign Countries
2013Co-Authors: Anna Zolotareva, Stanislav ShatalovAbstract:The paper discusses existing in theory approaches to the definition of Judicial Precedent, and the role of Precedent and Judicial law-making at all in common law countries and the countries of the Romano-Germanic law. Investigated the most complex aspects of the doctrine of stare decisis, including the problems of allocation ratio decidendi of judgments.
Li Jian - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Precedent:Another Method of Legal Interpretation——Also on construction of the institution of Judicial Precedent involving the private international law in China
Hebei Law Science, 2006Co-Authors: Li JianAbstract:Case law and statute law are individually the main source of law in the common-law system and civil-law system. However, as a method of legal creation and interpretation, the case law is not antagonistic to the statute law. The case law, characterized by reality and flexibility,can make up for the defects in application and interpretation of the statute law, for it has originated from Judicial decisions of judges. Statute law is traditionally characteristic of Chinese legal system. Introduction of the institution of Judicial Precedent could be necessary and beneficial to overcome defects in the current Judicial interpretation in China, and furthermore harmonize stability, flexibility and fairness in the course of applying the statute law. Especially in the private international law field, heavily lack of legal rules and provisions, the institution of Judicial Precedent can be transplanted so as to perfect the law.
-
Precedent another method of legal interpretation also on construction of the institution of Judicial Precedent involving the private international law in china
Hebei Law Science, 2006Co-Authors: Li JianAbstract:Case law and statute law are individually the main source of law in the common-law system and civil-law system. However, as a method of legal creation and interpretation, the case law is not antagonistic to the statute law. The case law, characterized by reality and flexibility,can make up for the defects in application and interpretation of the statute law, for it has originated from Judicial decisions of judges. Statute law is traditionally characteristic of Chinese legal system. Introduction of the institution of Judicial Precedent could be necessary and beneficial to overcome defects in the current Judicial interpretation in China, and furthermore harmonize stability, flexibility and fairness in the course of applying the statute law. Especially in the private international law field, heavily lack of legal rules and provisions, the institution of Judicial Precedent can be transplanted so as to perfect the law.
